School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
Med J Aust. 2010;193(11-12):702-6. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb04109.x.
To describe an in-depth analysis of the content and quality of stories about new cancer interventions in Australian media.
Search of the Media Doctor Australia media-monitoring website for stories about newly reported cancer interventions, including drugs, diagnostic tests, surgery and complementary therapies, that had been collected from June 2004 to June 2009 and rated for quality using a validated rating instrument. A mixed-methods approach was used to analyse data and story content. Data from the website on stories about other new health interventions and procedures were compared.
Differences in quality scores between cancer-related news stories ("cancer stories") and other stories, and between types of media outlet; differences in how cancer was reported in terms of cancer type, morbidity, mortality, and in the use of hyperbole and emotive language.
272 unique cancer stories were critically reviewed by Media Doctor Australia. Cancer stories had significantly higher scores for quality than other stories (F=7.1; df=1; P=0.008). Most cancer stories concerned disease affecting the breast or prostate gland, with breast cancer appearing to be over-represented as a topic relative to its incidence. Pairwise comparisons showed statistically significant superiority for broadsheet newspaper stories over online stories (F=12.7; df=1; P<0.001) and television stories (F=10.7; df=1; P=0.001). Descriptions of morbidity and mortality were variable and often confusing in terms of numbers, time periods and locations. Literary devices including hyperbole and emotive language were used extensively, mostly by the researchers.
While reporting of cancer in the general media is of low quality, many of the poorer aspects of content are directly attributable to the researchers. Researchers and journals need to do more to ensure that a higher standard of information about cancer is presented to the media.
深入分析澳大利亚媒体中有关新癌症干预措施的报道的内容和质量。
在 Media Doctor Australia 媒体监测网站上搜索有关新报告的癌症干预措施的故事，包括药物、诊断测试、手术和补充疗法，这些故事是从 2004 年 6 月到 2009 年 6 月收集的，并使用经过验证的评分工具对其质量进行评分。采用混合方法分析数据和故事内容。比较了网站上有关其他新健康干预措施和程序的故事的数据。
癌症相关新闻报道（“癌症报道”）与其他报道之间以及不同媒体类型之间的质量评分差异；报道癌症时在癌症类型、发病率、死亡率以及使用夸张和情绪化语言方面的差异。
Media Doctor Australia 对 272 个独特的癌症故事进行了批判性审查。癌症报道的质量评分明显高于其他报道（F=7.1；df=1；P=0.008）。大多数癌症报道涉及影响乳房或前列腺的疾病，乳腺癌作为一个话题相对于其发病率似乎被过度报道。两两比较显示，对开页报纸报道的评分明显高于在线报道（F=12.7；df=1；P<0.001）和电视报道（F=10.7；df=1；P=0.001）。发病率和死亡率的描述在数字、时间段和地点方面存在差异，且常常令人困惑。文学手法，包括夸张和情绪化的语言，被广泛使用，主要是由研究人员使用。
虽然大众媒体对癌症的报道质量较低，但内容较差的许多方面直接归因于研究人员。研究人员和期刊需要做更多的工作，以确保向媒体提供更高标准的有关癌症的信息。
